Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition
Harvard University ^ | June 2005 | Jeffrey A. Miron

Posted on 04/24/2006 12:33:31 PM PDT by davesdude

Executive Summary

Government prohibition of marijuana is the subject of ongoing debate.

One issue in this debate is the effect of marijuana prohibition on government budgets. Prohibition entails direct enforcement costs and prevents taxation of marijuana production and sale.

This report examines the budgetary implications of legalizing marijuana – taxing and regulating it like other goods – in all fifty states and at the federal level.

The report estimates that legalizing marijuana would save $7.7 billion per year in government expenditure on enforcement of prohibition. $5.3 billion of this savings would accrue to state and local governments, while $2.4 billion would accrue to the federal government.

The report also estimates that marijuana legalization would yield tax revenue of $2.4 billion annually if marijuana were taxed like all other goods and $6.2 billion annually if marijuana were taxed at rates comparable to those on alcohol and tobacco.

Whether marijuana legalization is a desirable policy depends on many factors other than the budgetary impacts discussed here. But these impacts should be included in a rational debate about marijuana policy.

http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/mironreport.html


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: bongwater; dazedandconfused; dopersrights; drankthebongwater; drugs; dudewheresmycar; hopheads; iseebutterflies; letssmokepot; liberdopertarian; marijuana; pot; potheads; prohibition; reefermadness; stoners; wod; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 461-476 next last
To: philman_36

I don't think America wants to go down the sleazy road some other countries have.
Outside of the recreational drug users who nobody cares about, there is no great movement for this stuff.


181 posted on 04/24/2006 5:44:35 PM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan

Thanks for pointing out! we'll go a bit further...

I projected the impact of prohibition if: 100% of all human said let's get rid of pot once and for all...which is wrong to think... so pot can be prohibited for sure but on the long term will have some negative effect on our planet... i'll explain what i mean simply by saying that prohibiting it is wrong, plain... a fundamental reason, but you got to already have tried it to understand, that pot is scientifically proved everywhere you read (except for some reasons on governmental studies,) to be non-addictive on the physical side...after experiencing with marijuana, a lot of mature user, that didn't started too young (like 15yr old) can tell you that yes it's addictive but only the habbit is...on the long run, you don't tolerate pot ( i mean you only need a puff to get the desired level of alteration)... and still, in singapore people get shot for smoking it...do you know why???


182 posted on 04/24/2006 5:46:48 PM PDT by davesdude (Don't criticize what you don't understand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Bogey
You think the government is going to make growing your own legal?
Eventually, yes. Don't you?
Have you seen the jail terms for people smuggling tobacco?
Internationally or in America?
You have to be kidding.
Not at all. Are you?
183 posted on 04/24/2006 5:47:28 PM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan

"So now you are saying that prohibiting pot is going to throw of the equilibrium of the planet? I'm trying to be serious, but you aren't making it any easier."

just make a bit of general reading on the matter, is what i am saying...


184 posted on 04/24/2006 5:48:20 PM PDT by davesdude (Don't criticize what you don't understand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
force all of my employees and government fund recipients to take a drug test. Failure would mean no job, and no benefits

Seems plain enough.

Your comprehension has not improved. The drug test would be of my choosing. Upon a request for clarification, I told you exactly what my priorities would be. Once again, I'm done with you. All you can do is parse and stammer.

185 posted on 04/24/2006 5:50:42 PM PDT by SampleMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan

"Thought so. I'll stick with my non enlightened views on social norms, taboos, and prohibited behavior. But just so everyone will know, would you be OK with an age of consent law for goats, or is that too much of an infringement as well?"

I think your jumping a bit too soon to the conclusion...


186 posted on 04/24/2006 5:52:30 PM PDT by davesdude (Don't criticize what you don't understand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
I don't think America wants to go down the sleazy road some other countries have.
You just can't and won't see anything good coming out of it, ever, will you?
Outside of the recreational drug users who nobody cares about, there is no great movement for this stuff.
Well, there sure as hell is a concerted effort by some folks to keep other folks "from" this stuff. They're spending almost as much as the Feds. I suggest that they wouldn't have to be spending so much money if there wasn't such a movement.
Somebody is getting fooled while somebody else is getting schooled.
187 posted on 04/24/2006 5:55:10 PM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
You've got some real hostility going.
More opinions?
What gives?
A charity?

For a little while I entertained the possibility that you might have something interesting to say in something approaching adult behavior. At least you get one point for proving me wrong about that.

188 posted on 04/24/2006 5:56:16 PM PDT by SampleMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
Your comprehension has not improved. The drug test would be of my choosing. Upon a request for clarification, I told you exactly what my priorities would be. Once again, I'm done with you. All you can do is parse and stammer.

I might be more inclined to consider your admonitions about my reading comprehension of your posts if you were able to read mine without seeing some imaginary "14th Amenement abyss" I'm supposed to delve into.

189 posted on 04/24/2006 5:57:44 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Gordongekko909

"Well, since I'm obviously a raging idiot who knows nothing about drugs, and you are a never-ending font of drug knowledge, why don't you tell me what the difference in chance is? All I said was that ODs are still possible with pure product."

ok, i am going a bit in flame...so tell me why do you think i am saying that unpure products OD VS pure product OD? because it is important to say it than just leave it simply to: "ODs are still possible with pure product."

I apologize on using bad words, but do you agree on the above...To me it is just logical to state this, as no study have obviously been done on the matter...It is just common sens!


190 posted on 04/24/2006 5:57:51 PM PDT by davesdude (Don't criticize what you don't understand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: ez

that's well said!


191 posted on 04/24/2006 5:59:29 PM PDT by davesdude (Don't criticize what you don't understand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: philman_36

Read a little closer. I think you have me mixed up with someone else, smart guy.


192 posted on 04/24/2006 6:02:13 PM PDT by Gordongekko909 (I know. Let's cut his WHOLE BODY off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Lady Jag

Thanks Lady! You always pop out of nowhere with those great articles!


193 posted on 04/24/2006 6:02:14 PM PDT by davesdude (Don't criticize what you don't understand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
Shoot them as they try and bring the cr@p over the border and a lot will get better.

Grab your rifle and head for the border.

194 posted on 04/24/2006 6:05:07 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: GLDNGUN

" I used an example to show a highly effective one. One that actually exists and that actually works in regard to human activity."

And the actual threat of being shot for not even getting close of one of the biggest lies of humanity or the biggest secret of humanity...has nothing to do with a personnal choice of smoking an herb...common sens...not everything is black and white...you're overdoing simply...


195 posted on 04/24/2006 6:06:59 PM PDT by davesdude (Don't criticize what you don't understand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: philman_36

I don't see anything coming out of the drug sub culture at all.
In fact I consider it a problem, not a blessing.


196 posted on 04/24/2006 6:12:03 PM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: TKDietz; All

Gee's man! Thanks AGAIN for that post! I hope more people ill read it!!

See post 120...http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1620659/posts?q=1&&page=101


197 posted on 04/24/2006 6:13:19 PM PDT by davesdude (Don't criticize what you don't understand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

Yeah, flood the tunnels and follow down the private planes that invade us as well.


198 posted on 04/24/2006 6:13:41 PM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: davesdude
ok, i am going a bit in flame...so tell me why do you think i am saying that unpure products OD VS pure product OD? because it is important to say it than just leave it simply to: "ODs are still possible with pure product."

I apologize on using bad words, but do you agree on the above...To me it is just logical to state this, as no study have obviously been done on the matter...It is just common sens!

I have NO idea what you just said.

199 posted on 04/24/2006 6:15:25 PM PDT by Gordongekko909 (I know. Let's cut his WHOLE BODY off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: GLDNGUN

"Again, if it's impossible to control human behavior, then we should completely abandon the idea of protecting our borders, right?"

Now you are getting on the moral side of things...you're forgetting about crimes with victims and crimes without victims which are not comparable...


200 posted on 04/24/2006 6:15:54 PM PDT by davesdude (Don't criticize what you don't understand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 461-476 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson